home-Suits-Design principle: “Form determines function” according to Louis Sullivan. “form follows function Control of software architecture

Design principle: “Form determines function” according to Louis Sullivan. “form follows function Control of software architecture

The book is devoted to the ideological and artistic problems of architecture, their significance in the complex of tasks of generally improving the quality and social efficiency of construction. Expressiveness and artistic imagery are shown in connection with the purpose of structures and the means of their implementation and at the same time as part of the social, ideological and educational functions of architecture. The means of composition used by modern architecture and their connection with the solution of ideological problems are analyzed. Particular attention is paid to the experiments of foreign postmodernism and the searches that unfolded in Soviet architecture of the 70-80s.

For architects and art historians.

Published by decision of the literature section on the architecture of residential, civil buildings and urban planning of the Stroyizdat editorial board.

Reviewer - Ph.D. Philosopher Sciences V.L. Glazychev.

INTRODUCTION... 5

FUNCTION AND FORM.. 10

ARCHITECTURAL FORM AND TECHNIQUE... 58

IMAGE AND FORM. 98

WORK OF ARCHITECTURE (MEANS OF COMPOSITION AND THEIR DEVELOPMENT IN MODERN ARCHITECTURE)... 142

ARCHITECTURE IN THE ARTISTIC CULTURE OF THE WEST OF THE 70'S (POSTMODERNISM)...208

DEVELOPMENT OF MEANS OF EXPRESSION IN SOVIET ARCHITECTURE OF THE 70'S - EARLY 80'S. 242

NOTES...282

NAME INDEX. Compiled by T. A. Gatova.. 284

Andrey Vladimirovich Ikonnikov- Doctor of Architecture, Professor. In 1960 he graduated from the Faculty of Architecture of the Institute of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture named after I. E. Repin, then combined teaching at this institute with creative work in design organizations in Leningrad. In 1966 he defended his doctoral dissertation “The Main Aesthetic Problems of the City.” Since 1966 he has lived and worked in Moscow, working on problems of the theory and history of architecture and design. In 1979 he was awarded the title of laureate of the USSR State Prize for his participation in the work on the 12-volume edition of the “General History of Architecture”. Author of a number of books, including “Aesthetic problems of mass housing construction” (Stroyizdat, 1966), “Fundamentals of architectural composition” (Art, 1971), “Modern architecture of Sweden” (Stroyizdat, 1978), “Stone Chronicle of Moscow” (Moscow Worker, 1978), “Architecture of the USA” (Art, 1979), “Foreign architecture: from “new architecture” to postmodernism” (Stroyizdat, 1982).

This section deals with the problems of placing residential and public functions in spaces that previously had completely different functions, for example, in former industrial buildings and structures or transport infrastructure facilities. The necessary approaches to this problem, in my opinion, can be given by considering the broader question of the essence of the concept of function in architecture, its history and evolution, as well as issues of interaction and mutual influence of functions in one object.

It is necessary to understand that the idea of ​​a function is a construct of human thinking, and is determined by its worldview. Let us turn, for example, to Michel Foucault’s book “Words and Things. Archeology of knowledge". Foucault, discussing the “order of things,” considers the research of Georges Cuvier (1769-1832), the founder of comparative anatomy, as an example of changing ideas about the world in modern times. Unlike his predecessors, the physician Cuvier introduces a classification of parts of the body not according to the principle of external similarity, but according to the principle of functional analogy (for example, he compares gills and lungs, identifying an abstract function that does not exist in material form separately from the object - breathing, which unites them ). Thus, Cuvier perhaps for the first time identifies and explores the very concept of function.

According to the definition of A.V. Ikonnikov, a function in architecture is “the whole complex of diverse tasks, logistical, technical and informational, solved by architecture.” Functional aspects are expressed to varying degrees in each work of architecture, but the most interesting to us are those examples from the history of architecture in which function (in some cases for the first time) acquired key importance in the architectural solution. Thus, in his other book - “The History of Madness in the Classical Age” - M. Foucault analyzes in detail the socio-architectural concept of the “panopticon” of the English philosopher, lawyer, author of the concept of utilitarianism Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832). Foucault considers the panopticon as a clear manifestation of the rational, utilitarian principle in the culture of modern times. Often mistakenly regarded as merely a design for a prison, the panopticon was the idea of ​​an architectural object that could contain and subordinate to the mind any homogeneous function. In terms of plan, the panopticon is, in fact, a prototype of a “circulated” corridor system, which only much later became widespread in functionalist architecture.

Separate mention should be made of fortification art, which, unlike contemporary architecture, was entirely subordinated to functional aspects. A function identified in the context of architecture can serve as a criterion for constructing a classification of architectural objects; such a classification led to the identification of building types. The typology, which perhaps reached its apotheosis in E. Neufert's reference book, found one of its first incarnations in the universal dictionary of architectural designs by Durand (1760-1834).

In many cases, however, the typology cannot determine the function of the building for its entire life. The reasons and nature of the change in function can be different and sometimes completely unexpected - for example, a particularly well-known example is a theater in Detroit converted into a parking lot. American researcher Stuart Brand, in his book “How Buildings Learn,” in this regard, identifies 6 main building structures, which, according to his assessment, have different rates of transformation. The Austrian researcher M. Plotegg, instead of replacing or transforming a function, puts forward, within the framework of his concept of “hybrid architecture,” the thesis about the superposition of functions, which makes it possible to significantly intensify the use of space. According to the content of the above works, the terms refunctionalization or renovation of functions in architecture can be distinguished.

The term renovation refers to the adaptive use of buildings, structures, and complexes when their functional purpose changes.

The feasibility of renovation and the introduction of alternative functions is determined by social, economic, psychological, historical and aesthetic factors. Many industrial enterprises are being moved from the city center to its outskirts, into the region. When abandoning the industrial use of the territory, it is planned to reduce the negative impact on the environment.

There are three fundamentally different directions for transforming industrial territories from a functional point of view:

  • · preservation of industrial function:
    • a) memorial path - complete restoration of the building, preservation of its original appearance (relevant for monuments of industrial architecture);
    • b) improvement - introduction of new production technologies into the existing volume of the building - reconstruction of the facility.
  • · partial refunctionalization:
    • a) reconstruction of the planning structure, the main principle of which is to isolate and preserve the most stable planning characteristics;
    • b) turning the object into a museum;
    • c) inclusion of new objects of urban significance in historical and industrial territories.
  • · complete refurbishment:
    • a) refunctionalization of existing monuments of industrial heritage according to the criteria of socio-cultural demand and relevance (repurposing industrial facilities into residential buildings, administrative and office centers, educational institutions, cultural and entertainment centers, hotels, trade enterprises, sports facilities);
    • b) environmental rehabilitation of the territory through the reclamation of disturbed areas, the creation of new green areas (parks, squares, alleys);
    • c) complete demolition of the industrial facility and use of the territory for other purposes.

Of the many existing methods for the reconstruction or refunctionalization of objects, we will highlight several basic ones that will allow us to adapt industrial architecture to modern conditions.

The first, the “application” method, involves creating a composition based on an existing structure; this is the reconstruction of the facade plane, the creation of a “false facade” (creating a composition of volumes and planes, different in color, texture, texture). This method involves working with the latest materials, creating a modern, beautiful shell.

The second - the method of “analogies” involves comparing the designed object with certain properties of a figurative analogue. The method is used precisely when it is necessary to give an object new qualities. It is more expedient for industrial architecture to use functional analogies: images, details, elements that speak not only about the function of the building, but also about the specifics of the enterprise. Technique: functional and artistic use of engineering equipment placed on the façade. And also technical analogies: images that arose on the basis of a technical product, or a conventional display on the facade of the technological process of an enterprise. Technique: real movement or artificially created technology effect: lighting, etc.

The third is “integration,” that is, the insertion of additional elements and structures into existing building structures. Technique: creating new dominants or strengthening old ones, adding volumes, communication spaces, changing the scale of the building (adaptability to the surrounding scale of development).

If we consider the relationship between industrial and residential volumes in the structure of urban development from the point of view of composition, we can highlight the following techniques for adapting industrial development to modern conditions:

  • - modification - changing an object or its parts in proportions, shape, position of parts, configuration;
  • - replacement - introduction of new individual projections, forms, functions, designs, materials, etc.;
  • - elimination or addition - reducing the number of forms, structures, functions or adding new ones that expand the capabilities of the solution;
  • - combination - combinatorics of ideas, properties, functional components, elements of an object among themselves;
  • - inversion - turning over, looking at a problem or situation from the opposite direction.

Thus, there are several directions, methods and techniques for adapting industrial heritage to the modern context of the city. The future of industrial architecture lies in its adaptation to rapidly developing technologies, which is achieved by reconstructing “inefficient” industrial volumes, or replacing functional purposes. And various architectural and compositional techniques make it possible to adapt and harmonize industrial facilities to the structure of an actively developing modern city.

Louis Sullivan publishes a book: Kindergarten Chats, later republished in 1947, where he continues to talk about the connection between function and form.

Here are typical fragments from the chapter “Function and Form” according to the 1947 edition:

“...any thing looks like what it is, as well as vice versa, that it is what it looks like. Before I continue, I must make an exception for those brown garden worms that I pick from rose bushes. At first glance, they can be mistaken for pieces of dry branches. But speaking generally, the appearance of things is similar to their internal purpose.

I will give examples: the shape of the oak is similar to the purpose or expresses the function of the oak; the shape of the pine tree resembles and indicates the function of the pine tree; the form of the horse has similarities and is a logical product of the function of the horse; the form of the spider resembles and tangibly confirms the function of the spider. Just like a waveform looks like a wave function; the shape of the cloud tells us about the function of the cloud; the shape of the rain indicates the function of the rain; the form of the bird reveals to us the function of the bird; the form of the eagle visibly embodies the function of the eagle; the shape of an eagle's beak indicates the function of that beak. Just as the shape of the rose bush confirms the function of the rose bush; the shape of the rose branch tells the function of the rose branch; the shape of a rosebud tells the function of a rosebud; in the form of a blossoming rose, the poem of a blossoming rose is read. Likewise, the form of man symbolizes the function of man; John Doe form means John Doe function; the shape of a smile gives us an idea of ​​the function of a smile; Therefore, in my phrase “a man named John Doe smiles” there are several inseparably interconnected functions and forms, which, however, seem to us very random. If I say that John Doe speaks and extends his hand, smiling, I will thereby slightly increase the number of functions and forms, but will not violate either their reality or consistency. If I say that he speaks illiterately and has a lisp, I will only slightly change the form in which your impressions take on as you listen to me; if I say that when he smiled, extended his hand and spoke illiterately and with a lisp, his lower lip trembled and tears welled up in his eyes - then don’t these functions and forms acquire their own rhythm of movement, don’t you move in your own rhythm, listening me, and don’t I move in my own rhythm when I speak? If I add that while talking, he sank helplessly into a chair, his hat fell from his relaxed fingers, his face turned pale, his eyelids closed, his head turned slightly to one side, I will only complement your impression of him and reveal my sympathy more deeply.

But I didn’t really add or subtract anything; I neither created nor destroyed; I say, you listen - John Doe lived. He knew nothing, and did not want to know, either about form or function; but he lived both; he paid for both as he walked his life’s path. He lived and died. You and I live and die. But John Doe lived the life of John Doe, not John Smith: such was his function, such were his forms.

So, the form of Roman architecture expresses, if it expresses anything at all, the function - the life of Rome; the form of American architecture will express, if it ever manages to express anything at all, American life; form - John Doe architecture, if such a thing existed, would mean nothing other than John Doe. I am not lying when I tell you that John Doe had a lisp, you are not lying when you listen to my words, he was not lying when he had a lisp; so why all this deceitful architecture? Why is John Doe's architecture being passed off as John Smith's architecture? Are we a nation of liars? I think no. Another thing is that we, architects, are a sect of crooked people who profess a cult of deceit. So, in the creations of man, music is the function of music; the shape of the knife is the function of the knife; the shape of the ax is the function of the ax; the shape of the motor is the function of the motor. Just as in nature the form of water is the function of water; the shape of the stream is the function of the stream; the shape of the river is the function of the river: the shape of the lake is the function of the lake; the shape of the reed is the function of the reed, firms fly above the water and swarm under the water - these are their corresponding functions; corresponds to its function and the fisherman in the boat and so on, on and on - continuously, endlessly, constantly, eternally - through the sphere of the physical world, visual, microscopic and observed through telescopes, to the world of feelings, the world of mind, the world of the heart, the world of the soul: physical the world of man, which we seem to know, and the border zone of the world, which we do not know - that world of the silent, immeasurable, creative spirit, whose unlimited function manifests itself in various ways in the form of all these things, in the form of more or less tangible, more or less elusive; the border zone is gentle as the dawn of life, dark as rock, humane as the smile of a friend, a world in which everything is function, everything is form; a terrible ghost that plunges the mind into despair, or, when our will is there, a magnificent revelation of the power that holds the pass with an invisible, merciful, merciless, miraculous hand. [...]

Form is in everything, everywhere and in every moment. According to all nature and function, some forms are definite, others indefinite; some are vague, others are specific and clearly defined; some have symmetry, others only rhythm. Some are abstract, others are material. Some are attracted by sight, others by hearing, some by touch, others by smell, some by only one of these senses, others by all or any combination of them. But all forms unmistakably symbolize the connections between the immaterial and the material, between the subjective and the objective - between the limitless spirit and the limited mind. With the help of feelings we know, in essence, everything that is given to us to know. Imagination, intuition, reason are only sublime forms of what we call physical senses. For Man, nothing exists except physical reality; what he calls his spiritual life is just the utmost flight of his animal nature. Little by little, Man cognizes Infinity with his feelings. His highest thoughts, his most delicate desires appear, imperceptibly originating and growing out of the material sense of touch. From the feeling of hunger arose the languor of his soul. From the roughest passions are the tenderest affections of his heart. From primitive instincts came to him the strength and power of his mind.

Everything grows, everything dies. Functions give birth to functions, and they in turn give life or bring death to others. Forms arise from forms and themselves grow or destroy others. All of them are correlated, intertwined, linked, connected and crossed with each other. They are in a continuous process of endosmosis and exosmosis (interleakage). They spin, spin, mix and move forever. They form, transform, dissipate. They react, communicate, attract and repel, grow together, disappear, appear again, sink and float: slowly or quickly, easily or with crushing force - from chaos to chaos, from death to life, from darkness to light, from light to darkness, from grief to joy, from joy to grief, from purity to dirt, from dirt to purity, from growth to decay, from decay to growth.

Everything is form, everything is function, constantly unfolding and folding, and with them the heart of Man unfolds and folds. Man is the only spectator before whose eyes passes this drama of all the stunning inspiring harmony of movement and splendor, when the bells ring out centuries of time, soaring from eternity to eternity: in the meantime, a bug sucks the juices of a petal, an ant diligently rushes back and forth, a songbird chirps branch, the violet in its simplicity lavishes a delicate fragrance.

Everything is function, everything is form, but their fragrance is in rhythm, their language is rhythm: for this rhythm is the wedding march and ceremony that accelerates the birth of a song when form and function are in perfect agreement, or that farewell dirge that sounds when they part. apart and sink into oblivion, forgotten in what we call the “past.” This is how history moves on an endless path.”

Quoted from the book: Ikonnikova A.V., Masters of Architecture about Architecture, M., “Art”, 1971, p. 46-49.

To ensure interaction between subsystems, in some cases it is not necessary to create any additional software components (besides the implementation of external functions) - pre-fixed agreements and standard capabilities of the base software (operating system) may be sufficient for this. So, in a complex of autonomously executed programs, to ensure interaction, a description (specification) of the general external information environment and the capabilities of the operating system for launching programs are sufficient. In a layered software system, the specification of dedicated software layers and the usual apparatus for calling procedures may be sufficient. In a software pipeline, communication between programs can also be facilitated by the operating system (as is the case in the operating system UNIX).

However, in some cases, to ensure interaction between software subsystems, it may be necessary to create additional software components. Thus, to control the operation of a complex of autonomously executed programs, a specialized command interpreter is often created, which is more convenient in a given subject area for preparing the required external information environment and launching the required program than the basic command interpreter of the operating system used. In layered software systems, a special apparatus for accessing layer procedures can be created (for example, ensuring parallel execution of these procedures). In a group of parallel programs, a special software subsystem is required to manage message ports. Such software components do not perform any external functions - they implement functions that arose as a result of the development of the software architecture. In this regard, we will call such functions architectural.

      1. Software architecture control

To control the PS architecture, adjacent control and manual simulation are used.

Related control of the software architecture from above is its control by the developers of the external description: the developers of the quality specification and the developers of the functional specification. Related control of the software architecture from below is its control by potential developers of software subsystems included in the software in accordance with the developed architecture.

Manual simulation of the software architecture is carried out similarly to manual simulation of the functional specification, only the purpose of this control is to check the interaction between software subsystems. Just as in the case of manual simulation of the functional specification of the software, tests must first be prepared. Then, for each such test, the development team must simulate the operation of each software subsystem included in the software. In this case, the operation of each subsystem is simulated by one developer (not the author of the architecture), carefully performing all the interactions of this subsystem with other subsystems (more precisely, with the developers imitating them) in accordance with the developed software architecture. This ensures the simulation functioning of the PS as a whole within the framework of the architecture being tested.



Related publications: